Amid a citywide crackdown to prevent restaurateurs from misleading consumers, San Francisco officials have released a list of 93 business owners who collected more money in employee health care surcharges in 2011 than they spent on health care for their workers.

The Chronicle obtained the list under a public records request after City Attorney Dennis Herrera announced Friday that he would be going after at least 50 San Francisco restaurants for allegedly charging diners extra fees to cover the cost of city-mandated health care for workers and then pocketing much of the money. (Click here to see the list.)

Herrera will not disclose which restaurants have come under scrutiny because the case is still under investigation, but officials say he is working from the list of 93 compiled as part of an audit by the Office of Labor Standards Enforcement.

None of the businesses on the list, which showed discrepancies ranging from a few bucks to hundreds of thousands of dollars, has been charged with crimes or sued by the city. Some on the labor office's list with the most glaring inconsistencies include restaurants from high-profile chefs Michael Mina, Tyler Florence, Nancy Oakes and Hubert Keller.

Under Healthy San Francisco, a program for uninsured residents, the city requires businesses with 20 or more workers to set aside money to be used toward employee health care. Many restaurant owners have added a surcharge to diners' bills - either a flat fee or a percentage of the tab - to cover the increased cost of the benefits. Since restaurant rents often are based on a percentage of food and beverage sales, a surcharge doesn't inflate the revenue. In theory, surcharges are designed to go straight to the employees, rather than the landlords.

Restaurant owners on the list deny misusing the money, many saying that the cash they collected is still in an account for workers who need medical care. Others say their surcharges were not just for employee health care, but also to cover the cost of other San Francisco requirements, taxes and fees. And some have just voiced confusion over the whole process.

"We complied with what we thought we were supposed to be doing," said Skip Young, a partner at AsiaSF, which according to the list spent only about 10 percent of the surcharges it collected from diners on employee health care.

Chance for correction

But San Francisco SupervisorDavid Campos has said he fears some restaurant owners have used the surcharge as an excuse to line their wallets by tricking diners into believing they were contributing to worthwhile benefit plans for workers.

On Friday, Herrera's office sent out target letters, giving restaurateurs and business owners an opportunity to rectify any problems. So far, none of the restaurateurs The Chronicle has talked with has acknowledged receiving a letter.

The Mina Group, which owns Michael Mina, Bourbon Steak, Clock Bar and RN74, said it has complied with the law and has been transparent. The restaurant company reported collecting $539,806 in employee health care surcharges in 2011, but the city's labor office says it spent only $211,809 on its workers' medical needs.

"Funds collected have not been misappropriated and all funds remain available to all current San Francisco employees," according to a statement from the company. "This surcharge is segregated in a cash reserve available for our employees to use toward health benefits. Mina Group provides a very robust health benefit plan that allows employees to roll over benefits year over year; it is not a use-it-or-lose-it plan. Unapplied funds are held and will continue to be held in a reserve solely for our employees."

Wayfare Tavern

Tony Marcell, the manager and a partner in Wayfare Tavern, one of the restaurants on the city's list, said that surcharges "continue to be used for our employees, and the remainder is still available for their health care needs." The restaurant, owned by celebrity chef Florence, took in $303,207 in employee health care surcharges in 2011, but reported spending only $68,018 on actual health care, according to the labor office.

"Wayfare Tavern has consistently complied with the Health Care Security Ordinance and is committed to our employees and their health care needs," Marcell said.

Oakes, whose restaurant Prospect is on the city's list for taking in $254,510 in 2011 and spending only $84,733, said she has not been contacted by the city attorney and didn't want to speculate. But she takes issue with the names of the 93 restaurants being released.

"It's a broad swipe, which is sad because there won't be a chance for each restaurant to tell its story," said Oakes, who also owns Boulevard, which is not on the list.

Image in spotlight

Doug Biederbeck, who has two restaurants on the list - Bix and MarketBar - says the city attorney's investigation has become a public relations nightmare for restaurants.

"We have followed every advisement from our attorneys," he said, adding that his restaurant's surcharges also cover other San Francisco requirements, including the city's minimum wage of $10.55 an hour, compared with $8 elsewhere in the state. "We feel like we are following the letter of the law. For a politician, especially the proponents of this, they don't want to get into the fine points. They want to be thought of as champions for health care and getting the so-called greedy restaurateurs."